Well said! I felt your "No One Robs An Empty House" post so deeply, as the crux of it is what I've been doing a lot of work around this year with codependency.
While I don't have an opinion on the Jonah Hill situation, one thing that I've been hearing and reading a lot about, particularly involving codependency, is that among the challenges is that when starting that work, or therapy in general, there can be this huge pendulum swing. So a person who historically has no boundaries and intellectualizes everything (*raises both hands) can all of a sudden be like a "boundary bully," as I heard Brene Brown discuss it. And so there can be the use of all these therapy words and perceived changes for the sake of saying that "the work" is being done without actually acknowledging and feeling into emotions and meeting needs that need to be met. It's performative, and just like checking off the box. And speaking as a man and doing a lot of work around healthier masculinity, I think this is especially a challenge for men who are so boundaryless and who've been so conditioned to suppress their emotions
Makes total sense! I’ve seen this in psychedelic healing communities, as well. Different language, similar pendulum swing. Which is also why, who the therapist / guide is, makes such a huge difference. One that can hold to account. It’s certainly a delicate path.
Modern talk based therapy is far more suited to women than men. Men seem to prefer to work through emotions as part of some kind of activity. Also men are naturally protective of women and so will tend to suppress any emotion (such as anger, frustration, sorrow) that would make women uncomfortable or disappointed in him.
This means men are most likely to open up in some sort of outdoor retreat with other men (and no women) where they get to actually do something constructive/ physical/ practical. This side-by-side approach is quite different to the more face-to-face approach that has become the standard.
In the past men had far more opportunities to be with other men (out logging, harvesting, fishing etc) where they could work through their feelings, but these days they tend to be cooped up in feminised workplaces full of women which makes them feel they must always tread on eggshells.
"I used to think if someone was in therapy, it meant that they were healthy, but for abusers and manipulators, therapy is just training."
It works the other way too. Therapists are increasingly using therapy to impose their ideological world view on the client (see also: teachers), which is unprofessional with adult clients and abusive in the case of younger clients. In fact there is now a growing movement within the therapy profession to push back against ideological material being inserted into training and being made part of 'standard practice' for therapists.
Having been once married to a man who proudly wore a weekly therapy sessions badge of honor (he had been in therapy for 15+ years straight by the time we split), I came to believe much of what you have written about here. I was too traumatized myself when we met and married to have the decrement needed to recognize that therapy did not equate a willingness to evolve, let alone that it could be dangerous. Which it was. And I will never forget the look on his face and the feeling in my body when I finally had the courage to tell him so. Needless to say, our divorce came soon after. Thank you for speaking to this, Liz. Even though I am much healed from the experience of that relationship and see where I did not trust my intuition many times over, and have grown from that, it still feels affirming to know that I am not the only one that does equate therapy as a green flag just for the sake of it. Not a popular opinion.
I can't share a full response atm, so for now I just want to say I think you bring up some important points but I have a few major issues and on the whole I don't think this is the most helpful take. I'll try to remember to come back later to elaborate.
Well said! I felt your "No One Robs An Empty House" post so deeply, as the crux of it is what I've been doing a lot of work around this year with codependency.
While I don't have an opinion on the Jonah Hill situation, one thing that I've been hearing and reading a lot about, particularly involving codependency, is that among the challenges is that when starting that work, or therapy in general, there can be this huge pendulum swing. So a person who historically has no boundaries and intellectualizes everything (*raises both hands) can all of a sudden be like a "boundary bully," as I heard Brene Brown discuss it. And so there can be the use of all these therapy words and perceived changes for the sake of saying that "the work" is being done without actually acknowledging and feeling into emotions and meeting needs that need to be met. It's performative, and just like checking off the box. And speaking as a man and doing a lot of work around healthier masculinity, I think this is especially a challenge for men who are so boundaryless and who've been so conditioned to suppress their emotions
Makes total sense! I’ve seen this in psychedelic healing communities, as well. Different language, similar pendulum swing. Which is also why, who the therapist / guide is, makes such a huge difference. One that can hold to account. It’s certainly a delicate path.
Great insight
Modern talk based therapy is far more suited to women than men. Men seem to prefer to work through emotions as part of some kind of activity. Also men are naturally protective of women and so will tend to suppress any emotion (such as anger, frustration, sorrow) that would make women uncomfortable or disappointed in him.
This means men are most likely to open up in some sort of outdoor retreat with other men (and no women) where they get to actually do something constructive/ physical/ practical. This side-by-side approach is quite different to the more face-to-face approach that has become the standard.
In the past men had far more opportunities to be with other men (out logging, harvesting, fishing etc) where they could work through their feelings, but these days they tend to be cooped up in feminised workplaces full of women which makes them feel they must always tread on eggshells.
"I used to think if someone was in therapy, it meant that they were healthy, but for abusers and manipulators, therapy is just training."
It works the other way too. Therapists are increasingly using therapy to impose their ideological world view on the client (see also: teachers), which is unprofessional with adult clients and abusive in the case of younger clients. In fact there is now a growing movement within the therapy profession to push back against ideological material being inserted into training and being made part of 'standard practice' for therapists.
Having been once married to a man who proudly wore a weekly therapy sessions badge of honor (he had been in therapy for 15+ years straight by the time we split), I came to believe much of what you have written about here. I was too traumatized myself when we met and married to have the decrement needed to recognize that therapy did not equate a willingness to evolve, let alone that it could be dangerous. Which it was. And I will never forget the look on his face and the feeling in my body when I finally had the courage to tell him so. Needless to say, our divorce came soon after. Thank you for speaking to this, Liz. Even though I am much healed from the experience of that relationship and see where I did not trust my intuition many times over, and have grown from that, it still feels affirming to know that I am not the only one that does equate therapy as a green flag just for the sake of it. Not a popular opinion.
I can't share a full response atm, so for now I just want to say I think you bring up some important points but I have a few major issues and on the whole I don't think this is the most helpful take. I'll try to remember to come back later to elaborate.
An interesting and troubling twist given Jonah Hill's very compelling Netflix documentary on his therapy, "Stutz".